In polar opposition to the stupidity below, Barry over at Ampersand had the class to email me and ask me to clarify what he thought was my position on divestment and anti-semitism, an area where we have disagreed in the past. He stated that he wanted to have an argument around my real position, rather than a strawman, and went out of his way to privately contact me and try and confirm what he understood my position to be.
We may disagree on issues, but for this hes the Blogger Of The Day as far as Im concerned. My reply to him is below:
OK, here’s a first cut:
>As I understand it, the argument you’re making connecting divestment
>campaigns to anti-Semitism can be summed up this way:
>
>1. Anti-Semitism is bigotry against Jews.
OK
>2. “Divestment from Israel” campaigns single out Israel, among all the
>nations (many of which are worse than Israel), for activist opposition.
Unlike other ‘divestment’ candidates (South Africa the best example), the threat to Israel is external and real; South Africa faced no meaningful threat to it’s existence as a nation, nor did the white or colored South Africans face a real, organized threat to their lives. Divestment supporters don’t take this into account when criticising Israel’s actions, nor to they have a realistic response. Mandela wanted to see non-whites get their equitable share of political and economic power; the core positions of the Palestinian political powers remain a vague commitment to a two-state solution in English, and ‘from the river to the sea’ in Arabic. None of this is dealt with or remarked on in the pro-‘peace’ or pro-divestment comments I’ve read.
>3. There is no reason to single out Israel, except that Israel is a Jewish
>state.
I don’t believe that’s why the divestment campaign has focussed on Israel; I think it is for a variety of reasons: 1) I think that the philosophical bent is linked to the anti-colonial, anti-modern philosophical strains I’ve discussed at length in the blog, and Israel represents both colonialism – both in its foundation after WW2, and in it’s effectrive treatment of the Occupied Territories – and modernity, in its embrace of technology, markets, and pluralism. I wonder what the discussion would have been like if Israel’s identity was as self-consciously socialist as it was in the 50’s. 2) I think that it is the natural inclination to root for the underdog, and (as when I was in school) the visual rhetoric of powerful war machines bearing down on a peasant population tends to drive arguments.
>4. Therefore, the reason pro-divestment activists have singled out Israel
>is
>that Israel is a Jewish state.
Don’t think that.
>5. Therefore, pro-divestment activists are anti-Semites.
I do think they are anti-Semitic in a variety of ways; they accept the hateful rhetoric promulgated by many of the Palestinian organizations (how would the broad student community react to a poster suggesting that the secret ingredient in Afican-American ‘soul food’ was white babies? No one in this half-century would have even _thought_ of saying or doing such a thing), and I think the pro-PA student movement discredits itself by excusing that kind of behavior; and more, importantly I do connect the existence of Israel as a predominantly Jewish state (this has its own problems that I’ll probably write about soon) with the ‘state’ of the Jewish people thoughout the world (note: I’m not Jewish; but I did grow up in a predominantly Jewish community). And what I do not see on the part of the divestment activists or any of the pro-Palestinian ‘peace’ community is any thoughful response to the real threat to the existance of Israel and the people who live there. The best I can see is the possibly sincere hope that if they lay their arms down, the Palestinians will do the same; something sadly not borne out in recent history.
I think Israel has done some illegal, immoral, and stupid things, partly from a knee-jerk reactiveness, partly out of fear. I do think that the palestinians have been screwed over, by the israelis on one side, and by the other Arab states and their own insane leadership on the other.
As I’ve said many times in the blog, I think that the average Palestinian isn’t a monster, but someone who wants food, shelter, work, the love of their family and a better future for their children – none of which are in wide supply today.
Does this help stake out a position that’s clear??
And thanks for asking me to explain…in careful discussion, we have a chance to find a common ground in this mess.
A.L.
Date: 10/15/2002 00:00:00 AM
Devra, you may not like the way it’s phrased (I don’t), but it’s legitmate to observe that settlements aren’t just knee-jerk responses to fear. Ariel Sharon himself is credited with the expression “creating facts on the ground”, which sounds fairly calculated to me.That said, I don’t think the observation takes a thing away from the meat of the arguments in the post.
Date: 10/15/2002 00:00:00 AM
I don’t think settlements came out of either reaction or fear. They are too well-planned (and expensive) for that. They come out of a desire on the part of a certain section of the Israeli Jewish polity to take the West Bank and Gaza for their own.
Date: 10/14/2002 00:00:00 AM
The great thing about the Internet is the opportunity to have interesting, civil discussions with intelligent, polite people like you and Barry.The bad thing about the Internet, of course, is that there are an awful lot of folks like the fellow below … Oy.